Three headed giants with the heads of TSR founders... and S & M
June 13, 2018 7:40 PM Subscribe
An oral history of B3: Palace of the Silver Princess, the racy module that almost sunk Dungeons and Dragons. Some more details. A review.
I had a copy of this, but sadly it was the green cover...though I would have been too young at the time to realize it had any value if I had found one of the originals.
posted by nubs at 7:48 PM on June 13, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by nubs at 7:48 PM on June 13, 2018 [1 favorite]
I remember playing the later (green) version. When I read the Wired article just now and saw the infamous illustration from the original, my first thought was
Wow that’s mild
My mom was caught up in the satanic panic and took away my modules for a while. And yet today when I walk through the young adult section at Barnes and Noble with my kids it’s like 99% scantily clad girls who are in love with vampires or are vampires or are caught up in a twisted sexy version of a classic fairy tale or some shenanigans. My mom would have gone full on BERSERK.
posted by freecellwizard at 7:53 PM on June 13, 2018 [10 favorites]
Wow that’s mild
My mom was caught up in the satanic panic and took away my modules for a while. And yet today when I walk through the young adult section at Barnes and Noble with my kids it’s like 99% scantily clad girls who are in love with vampires or are vampires or are caught up in a twisted sexy version of a classic fairy tale or some shenanigans. My mom would have gone full on BERSERK.
posted by freecellwizard at 7:53 PM on June 13, 2018 [10 favorites]
Grabbing a few friends and a copy of an old module is actually a great way to spend an evening - they're almost rules free if you have a couple of tables from the DMG and have access to a d20 or two and the spell lists from the players handbook.
I've done this with Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh (stone classic haunted house mystery) Tomb of Horrors (brilliantly constructed RPG version of Hellraiser's Lament Configuration) and Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan (possibly the apogee of the bastard hard puzzle dungeon, and genuinely tense with its inbuilt poison gas timer).
posted by Sebmojo at 8:45 PM on June 13, 2018 [1 favorite]
I've done this with Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh (stone classic haunted house mystery) Tomb of Horrors (brilliantly constructed RPG version of Hellraiser's Lament Configuration) and Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan (possibly the apogee of the bastard hard puzzle dungeon, and genuinely tense with its inbuilt poison gas timer).
posted by Sebmojo at 8:45 PM on June 13, 2018 [1 favorite]
I still love you, Tomb of Horrors, even if you were in stupid ass Ready Player One.
posted by Artw at 8:46 PM on June 13, 2018 [14 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:46 PM on June 13, 2018 [14 favorites]
It's a testament to how much D&D has come back that this obscure piece of early TSR history gets any attention at all. Not a lot has changed about ol' B3 in the intervening 35 years. It generated just as much WTF when it was published, just fewer people cared. And the whole Basic/Expert D&D bifurcation was itself pretty short-lived. I got the '81 red box set as a Christmas gift as a kid but a few years later everyone had moved on the AD&D. I don't know why they bothered continuing with Companion and Master editions - all the modules being published were for AD&D as were the various campaign settings. Well, I sort of know why - TSR was terribly managed.
Anyway, in summary, D&D is a land of contrasts.
posted by GuyZero at 9:03 PM on June 13, 2018 [2 favorites]
Anyway, in summary, D&D is a land of contrasts.
posted by GuyZero at 9:03 PM on June 13, 2018 [2 favorites]
And on to the Immortal set, as well.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:46 PM on June 13, 2018
posted by Chrysostom at 9:46 PM on June 13, 2018
I used to run Palace of the Silver Princess (the green cover one) for my friends back in the day. It was a good module. The only other Level 1 module I owned was B2, Keep on the Borderlands, which was nice and sandboxy, but in those days that was likely to get you killed.
My son asked me yesterday, "What made first edition so deadly?" I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got. And for hp, you rolled one die. A magic user had a 1 in 4 chance of only having one hit point. Same magic user got one spell to use every day, other than that, it was dagger time (and no armor). There were no "death saves," once you reach zero hp, it's time to roll up a new character. So there was no point in thinking up a backstory until you'd survived a couple of levels (and none of this leveling up at 300xp, 2nd level was 1000xp away!).
So yeah, you can take your OSR and I'll play 5e, thanks. The meat grinder of early D&D was amusing, but not as much fun to inhabit.
posted by rikschell at 6:01 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
My son asked me yesterday, "What made first edition so deadly?" I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got. And for hp, you rolled one die. A magic user had a 1 in 4 chance of only having one hit point. Same magic user got one spell to use every day, other than that, it was dagger time (and no armor). There were no "death saves," once you reach zero hp, it's time to roll up a new character. So there was no point in thinking up a backstory until you'd survived a couple of levels (and none of this leveling up at 300xp, 2nd level was 1000xp away!).
So yeah, you can take your OSR and I'll play 5e, thanks. The meat grinder of early D&D was amusing, but not as much fun to inhabit.
posted by rikschell at 6:01 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
Shout out to Castle Amber (Chateau de Amberville)! The most balls to the wall insane module ever. And that's taking into account Expedition to the Barrier Peaks ;)
posted by triage_lazarus at 6:34 AM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by triage_lazarus at 6:34 AM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
I remember this, and there was the scuttlebutt that some of them got out and to game stores. (I heard it from the woman who ran the bookstore I got my gaming stuff from back in that day - that the module was considered "not right for children" which is why it was recalled. (She said "they need to see what the girls are buying over in Romance" as she grinned.)
I've got a long-time love of tabletop RPG gaming, from 1st Edition and the set with the red dragon on the cover, all the way to now, along with a lot of other games (Champions, Star Wars, Shadowrun, Cyberpunk, even Rifts when we're feeling silly). Need to get back into it - it's been a hard year for me and gaming, for personal reasons.
posted by mephron at 7:05 AM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
I've got a long-time love of tabletop RPG gaming, from 1st Edition and the set with the red dragon on the cover, all the way to now, along with a lot of other games (Champions, Star Wars, Shadowrun, Cyberpunk, even Rifts when we're feeling silly). Need to get back into it - it's been a hard year for me and gaming, for personal reasons.
posted by mephron at 7:05 AM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
a few years later everyone had moved on the AD&D.
Never. NEVER. BASIC/EXPERT/COMPANION FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS.
also, i was bummed after reading this to check in with my old mid-80s dnd pals and confirm that the copy of Silver Princess they owned was the bowdlerized version
posted by the phlegmatic king at 7:25 AM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Never. NEVER. BASIC/EXPERT/COMPANION FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS.
also, i was bummed after reading this to check in with my old mid-80s dnd pals and confirm that the copy of Silver Princess they owned was the bowdlerized version
posted by the phlegmatic king at 7:25 AM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got. And for hp, you rolled one die. A magic user had a 1 in 4 chance of only having one hit point. Same magic user got one spell to use every day, other than that, it was dagger time (and no armor). There were no "death saves," once you reach zero hp, it's time to roll up a new character. So there was no point in thinking up a backstory until you'd survived a couple of levels (and none of this leveling up at 300xp, 2nd level was 1000xp away!).
It was a game that showed its roots in tabletop wargamming; these weren't really "characters" yet, but more "units" with a move in the direction of having a personality and things. But at heart, it was supposed to be about overcoming tactical challenges in the dungeon with a layer of Conan/LOTR/Dying Earth fiction sprinkled on for flavor - to give the units a reason to be in the dungeon. Over time, the storytelling aspect became more important...but yeah, in 1st Ed, you were a fragile thing with a limited life expectancy; it was common at my tables for everyone to be "playing" multiple characters, because they were really just stat blocks.
Experience was also handled differently - you got it not only for killing monsters, but also for treasure gained; the point was to make just looting a valuable thing to do, and to avoid conflict if possible because it could be so deadly (which makes me think that the artwork on the PHB - of two adventurers trying to steal a massive gem without being noticed - was a big nod to the idea that adventurers were tomb robbers more than anything else). But in my experience, it lead to players trying to kill everything and hoover up all the loot to maximize XP gain.
Anyways, each edition - and the multitude of other games out there - is like a game engine for a video game. They are good for particular types & styles of gaming, and finding what works for the story your group wants to tell is important. If I were to fire up a West Marches style of game, I think I might lean towards a OSC/1st Edition ruleset because it would fit with what a West Marches game should run like, I think...but 5e is tilted towards a more epic story/narrative style of gaming.
Anyways, I'm really enjoying 5e and the resurgence of the hobby. Some of the guys I play with now - a couple of whom I played with in our teens/twenties, when this was decidedly uncool! - sometimes gripe about the popularity of the game, that there are livestreams and podcasts and famous people playing (and people getting famous for playing) but I'm quick to point out that it's a good thing. Who cares that we played before it was cool? It's cool now, let's enjoy it, let's savour the moment that our hobby & passion is shared by so many and so freely and be welcoming to the newcomers, because the growth of anything that brings people joy and happiness is a good thing.
posted by nubs at 8:13 AM on June 14, 2018 [8 favorites]
It was a game that showed its roots in tabletop wargamming; these weren't really "characters" yet, but more "units" with a move in the direction of having a personality and things. But at heart, it was supposed to be about overcoming tactical challenges in the dungeon with a layer of Conan/LOTR/Dying Earth fiction sprinkled on for flavor - to give the units a reason to be in the dungeon. Over time, the storytelling aspect became more important...but yeah, in 1st Ed, you were a fragile thing with a limited life expectancy; it was common at my tables for everyone to be "playing" multiple characters, because they were really just stat blocks.
Experience was also handled differently - you got it not only for killing monsters, but also for treasure gained; the point was to make just looting a valuable thing to do, and to avoid conflict if possible because it could be so deadly (which makes me think that the artwork on the PHB - of two adventurers trying to steal a massive gem without being noticed - was a big nod to the idea that adventurers were tomb robbers more than anything else). But in my experience, it lead to players trying to kill everything and hoover up all the loot to maximize XP gain.
Anyways, each edition - and the multitude of other games out there - is like a game engine for a video game. They are good for particular types & styles of gaming, and finding what works for the story your group wants to tell is important. If I were to fire up a West Marches style of game, I think I might lean towards a OSC/1st Edition ruleset because it would fit with what a West Marches game should run like, I think...but 5e is tilted towards a more epic story/narrative style of gaming.
Anyways, I'm really enjoying 5e and the resurgence of the hobby. Some of the guys I play with now - a couple of whom I played with in our teens/twenties, when this was decidedly uncool! - sometimes gripe about the popularity of the game, that there are livestreams and podcasts and famous people playing (and people getting famous for playing) but I'm quick to point out that it's a good thing. Who cares that we played before it was cool? It's cool now, let's enjoy it, let's savour the moment that our hobby & passion is shared by so many and so freely and be welcoming to the newcomers, because the growth of anything that brings people joy and happiness is a good thing.
posted by nubs at 8:13 AM on June 14, 2018 [8 favorites]
This article really wants me to get a shovel and go dig some holes in Lake Geneva.
posted by yomimono at 8:22 AM on June 14, 2018
posted by yomimono at 8:22 AM on June 14, 2018
The third piece [of controversial art] is of an adventurer holding out a steak to an angry bear -- but to management, looked like the adventurer was offering the bear his penis.
A lot of the moral panic over this module is wildly overreacting, but for this one they're not exactly wrong, hehehe.
posted by FatherDagon at 8:32 AM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
A lot of the moral panic over this module is wildly overreacting, but for this one they're not exactly wrong, hehehe.
posted by FatherDagon at 8:32 AM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got. And for hp, you rolled one die. A magic user had a 1 in 4 chance of only having one hit point. Same magic user got one spell to use every day, other than that, it was dagger time (and no armor).
And it was about an hour after the first Basic set was released onto the market, that someone said, "Eh, let's make it 4D6, drop lowest. And give everyone max hit points at first level." And a couple hours after that, someone whipped the first variant mana-based magic system to give magic users more oomph. A couple years later you had wild things like Arduin Grimore.
The thing was, basic D&D had so many points of irritation that the natural inclination was "Eh, I can fix that." And there was basically no end to the things that could be fixed and modified. So you get someone saying, "OK I'm going to fix hit points, with a hit location system, and have armor soak damage. And then I'm going to put in a percentile skill system. Eh, while I'm at it, I'll put combat on that skill system, and while I'm at it, I'll get rid of levels. And I'll change the name of Wisdom to Power, and make spells cost power points." And at that point, you might as well not call it D&D, but something else. Like Runequest. Basically nearly all games from the early 80s that has a variation of the Six Stats, probably started out as a variant of D&D.
So that's one of the things I don't like about the OSR "rulings not rules" thing. The natural inclination of GM's has always been to alter or make new rules. And then write them down. And often, publish them.
posted by happyroach at 9:24 AM on June 14, 2018 [7 favorites]
And it was about an hour after the first Basic set was released onto the market, that someone said, "Eh, let's make it 4D6, drop lowest. And give everyone max hit points at first level." And a couple hours after that, someone whipped the first variant mana-based magic system to give magic users more oomph. A couple years later you had wild things like Arduin Grimore.
The thing was, basic D&D had so many points of irritation that the natural inclination was "Eh, I can fix that." And there was basically no end to the things that could be fixed and modified. So you get someone saying, "OK I'm going to fix hit points, with a hit location system, and have armor soak damage. And then I'm going to put in a percentile skill system. Eh, while I'm at it, I'll put combat on that skill system, and while I'm at it, I'll get rid of levels. And I'll change the name of Wisdom to Power, and make spells cost power points." And at that point, you might as well not call it D&D, but something else. Like Runequest. Basically nearly all games from the early 80s that has a variation of the Six Stats, probably started out as a variant of D&D.
So that's one of the things I don't like about the OSR "rulings not rules" thing. The natural inclination of GM's has always been to alter or make new rules. And then write them down. And often, publish them.
posted by happyroach at 9:24 AM on June 14, 2018 [7 favorites]
The most amazing thing to me is that D&Ds dumb and transparently-made-to-be-a-game-mechanic spell memorization system is actually lifted straight out of the stories of Jack Vance.
posted by Artw at 9:33 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:33 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
The most amazing thing to me is that D&Ds dumb and transparently-made-to-be-a-game-mechanic spell memorization system is actually lifted straight out of the stories of Jack Vance.
It doesn't stop there! Vecna, one of the great long running nasty evils of most D&D universes is just an anagram of Vance. And I seem to recall reading somewhere that haflings were originally going to just be called hobbits, until the estate of JRR Tolkien cleared its throat. One of the demons in the Monster Manual was called a Balrog, if memory serves...
posted by nubs at 10:15 AM on June 14, 2018
It doesn't stop there! Vecna, one of the great long running nasty evils of most D&D universes is just an anagram of Vance. And I seem to recall reading somewhere that haflings were originally going to just be called hobbits, until the estate of JRR Tolkien cleared its throat. One of the demons in the Monster Manual was called a Balrog, if memory serves...
posted by nubs at 10:15 AM on June 14, 2018
The Lovecraft estate* had some quick calls to them over that edition also.
* which is its own fucked up state of affairs.
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
* which is its own fucked up state of affairs.
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
haflings were originally going to just be called hobbits, until the estate of JRR Tolkien cleared its throat.
"Treant" is the most transparent renaming of "ents" possible.
The most amazing thing to me is that D&Ds dumb and transparently-made-to-be-a-game-mechanic spell memorization system is actually lifted straight out of the stories of Jack Vance.
it is kinda crazy that Vance designed such a game-oriented mechanic without even trying.
posted by GuyZero at 10:26 AM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
"Treant" is the most transparent renaming of "ents" possible.
The most amazing thing to me is that D&Ds dumb and transparently-made-to-be-a-game-mechanic spell memorization system is actually lifted straight out of the stories of Jack Vance.
it is kinda crazy that Vance designed such a game-oriented mechanic without even trying.
posted by GuyZero at 10:26 AM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Hmmm, Bill Willingham didn’t like working on a project written by a woman? This is my surprised face.
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:19 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:19 AM on June 14, 2018 [6 favorites]
happyroach: "And at that point, you might as well not call it D&D, but something else."
One's thoughts immediately turn to the infamous Gary Gygax column "Poker, Chess, and the AD&D System." Gygax's position was that any house ruling meant that you weren't, in fact, playing D&D/AD&D.
posted by Chrysostom at 12:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
One's thoughts immediately turn to the infamous Gary Gygax column "Poker, Chess, and the AD&D System." Gygax's position was that any house ruling meant that you weren't, in fact, playing D&D/AD&D.
posted by Chrysostom at 12:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
This post is SHAMELESS PANDERING. to me.
posted by duffell at 12:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by duffell at 12:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
The Lovecraft estate* had some quick calls to them over that edition [of the Monster Manual] also.
Nnnnoooo...?
Cthulhu mythos stuff appeared in the first edition of _Dieties & Demigods_ (1980), because TSR thought that was all public domain. Arkham House claimed copyright for some of the material, however, and they had already licensed it to Chaosium for the purposes of making games.
That edition of _Dieties..._ also includes a pantheon taken from Michael Moorcock's Elric books. While TSR had permission from Moorcock to use his stuff, Chaosium actually owned the rights to publish games based on *those* works, too.
Some later first edition print runs of _Dieties..._ include credits to Chaosium for allowing their use. Second ed pulled both pantheons from the book, reducing the page count by 16.
posted by hanov3r at 12:25 PM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
Nnnnoooo...?
Cthulhu mythos stuff appeared in the first edition of _Dieties & Demigods_ (1980), because TSR thought that was all public domain. Arkham House claimed copyright for some of the material, however, and they had already licensed it to Chaosium for the purposes of making games.
That edition of _Dieties..._ also includes a pantheon taken from Michael Moorcock's Elric books. While TSR had permission from Moorcock to use his stuff, Chaosium actually owned the rights to publish games based on *those* works, too.
Some later first edition print runs of _Dieties..._ include credits to Chaosium for allowing their use. Second ed pulled both pantheons from the book, reducing the page count by 16.
posted by hanov3r at 12:25 PM on June 14, 2018 [2 favorites]
The orange B3 is interestingly open-ended, and encourages the DM to think of areas of rooms controlled by monsters and factions within the dungeon which is pretty crucial. It's fine. It definitely could have used more editing and polish, but it sounds like within TSR it had more enemies than allies.
The green version is, room for room, pretty similar, except everything has been sewn up and simplified. Like, the chaotic cleric in the orange one is a sociopath but not necessarily hostile to the party, and he's got interesting NPC allies; in the green one he's doing visible evil right now and his allies are monsters and they all attack on sight.
In the green version the gem is the maguffin, it needs to be destroyed in one of three ways to keep the Big Bad from appearing, and then there's a happy ending. In the orange version maybe the players piece together bits of a tragic love story but maybe not.
posted by fleacircus at 12:27 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
The green version is, room for room, pretty similar, except everything has been sewn up and simplified. Like, the chaotic cleric in the orange one is a sociopath but not necessarily hostile to the party, and he's got interesting NPC allies; in the green one he's doing visible evil right now and his allies are monsters and they all attack on sight.
In the green version the gem is the maguffin, it needs to be destroyed in one of three ways to keep the Big Bad from appearing, and then there's a happy ending. In the orange version maybe the players piece together bits of a tragic love story but maybe not.
posted by fleacircus at 12:27 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
I've been thinking about getting back into D&D, but I have a reflexive distrust of newer editions. Is that misplaced these days? (I'm not quite ground floor, but started playing D&D in 1982, and stopped around 1990.)
posted by jzb at 1:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by jzb at 1:01 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
hanov3r - cheers, I got my books confused.
Arkham house’s claims and consequently Chaosiums are of course bullshit and I shouldn’t really call them “the Lovecraft estate” either.
posted by Artw at 1:09 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Arkham house’s claims and consequently Chaosiums are of course bullshit and I shouldn’t really call them “the Lovecraft estate” either.
posted by Artw at 1:09 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
I've been thinking about getting back into D&D, but I have a reflexive distrust of newer editions. Is that misplaced these days? (I'm not quite ground floor, but started playing D&D in 1982, and stopped around 1990.)
I mean, it's certainly different nowadays. The current edition (5E) is set up to be easier to learn - a lot of consistency in how things work, and fewer rules for every single instance (If you like a different rule or modifier for every single thing, check out pathfinder). 5th edition is also set up to be more role-play friendly - if you're interested in a straight dungeon crawl, try 4th edition.
5th edition D&D is a good middle-of-the-road RPG that's easier to teach beginners than some of the other editions. There are plenty of RPGs that are better for the roleplay aspect, or the combat aspect, but generally it's pretty good at everything it's setting out to do. My advice is try to forget as many of the AD&D rules as possible - the player that I had the most trouble getting up to speed was the old school D&D player who was constantly shocked to hear that things had changed in the twenty-five years since he'd last played.
posted by dinty_moore at 1:32 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
I mean, it's certainly different nowadays. The current edition (5E) is set up to be easier to learn - a lot of consistency in how things work, and fewer rules for every single instance (If you like a different rule or modifier for every single thing, check out pathfinder). 5th edition is also set up to be more role-play friendly - if you're interested in a straight dungeon crawl, try 4th edition.
5th edition D&D is a good middle-of-the-road RPG that's easier to teach beginners than some of the other editions. There are plenty of RPGs that are better for the roleplay aspect, or the combat aspect, but generally it's pretty good at everything it's setting out to do. My advice is try to forget as many of the AD&D rules as possible - the player that I had the most trouble getting up to speed was the old school D&D player who was constantly shocked to hear that things had changed in the twenty-five years since he'd last played.
posted by dinty_moore at 1:32 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
You can also go to a game store and find people who want to play AD&D. It's easier to find people to play 5E, but I run into them all the time. There's no reason why you would have to go with the current ruleset if you don't want to.
posted by dinty_moore at 1:37 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by dinty_moore at 1:37 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Pathfinder seems to have receded slightly as the best way of oldschooling it.
posted by Artw at 1:43 PM on June 14, 2018
posted by Artw at 1:43 PM on June 14, 2018
A lot of us back in the day saw 2nd Edition as being a cash grab by TSR to make us all re-buy the core books. In point of fact, that's not too far from the truth. Gygax & Co never really solved the problem of creating a system of rules for creating your own content, thereby creating customers who don't need to buy anything else from you. The modules were interesting to pick up now and then, but there was a much bigger focus on building your own content back then. (And TSR was infamous for being poorly run.)
Looking back, though, a lot of amazing content came out with 2E: Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Planescape. 3rd Ed was after Wizards of the Coast had bought TSR. D&D was a token property, and everyone was playing Magic: the Gathering, I guess? 3e, 3.5e, and Pathfinder are known for having an infinite panoply of "splatbooks." This was WotC's solution to the content problem. Players like customizing their characters, so release dozens of books with hundreds of fiddly options. Min/maxing and munchkins ruled the day, from what I understand (many people still enjoy this style of play, and mostly play Pathfinder, which has just announced it's own second edition, which looks to move closer to D&D5e).
4e is basically World of Warcraft on paper. Every class is perfectly balanced against each other, which many people felt made all characters feel samey-samey. It was VERY combat focused: you had to use a grid and miniatures, and role-playing was de-emphasized (again, following the computer role playing game model). In a way, it was a return to the system's wargaming roots. But a lot of folks didn't like it, and it hastened the way for 5e.
I feel lucky to have taken the long way round back to D&D, because most of that doesn't sound fun to me. 5th ed, though, feels like the game I grew up playing, except with a lot less time spent looking for the right chart or table. The mechanics are streamlined in beautiful ways, the roleplaying is front and center. Characters are less squishy and worth building backstories for, but danger is still real. There's tons of lore that's been built up over the decades that DM's are free to use or adapt or ignore.
My current group started playing one of the hardcover 5e adventures, which has now morphed into pulling in all sorts of material from various 2e box sets. We've been playing the same campaign for over 2 years now, weekly, and show no signs of slowing down.
posted by rikschell at 2:53 PM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
Looking back, though, a lot of amazing content came out with 2E: Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Planescape. 3rd Ed was after Wizards of the Coast had bought TSR. D&D was a token property, and everyone was playing Magic: the Gathering, I guess? 3e, 3.5e, and Pathfinder are known for having an infinite panoply of "splatbooks." This was WotC's solution to the content problem. Players like customizing their characters, so release dozens of books with hundreds of fiddly options. Min/maxing and munchkins ruled the day, from what I understand (many people still enjoy this style of play, and mostly play Pathfinder, which has just announced it's own second edition, which looks to move closer to D&D5e).
4e is basically World of Warcraft on paper. Every class is perfectly balanced against each other, which many people felt made all characters feel samey-samey. It was VERY combat focused: you had to use a grid and miniatures, and role-playing was de-emphasized (again, following the computer role playing game model). In a way, it was a return to the system's wargaming roots. But a lot of folks didn't like it, and it hastened the way for 5e.
I feel lucky to have taken the long way round back to D&D, because most of that doesn't sound fun to me. 5th ed, though, feels like the game I grew up playing, except with a lot less time spent looking for the right chart or table. The mechanics are streamlined in beautiful ways, the roleplaying is front and center. Characters are less squishy and worth building backstories for, but danger is still real. There's tons of lore that's been built up over the decades that DM's are free to use or adapt or ignore.
My current group started playing one of the hardcover 5e adventures, which has now morphed into pulling in all sorts of material from various 2e box sets. We've been playing the same campaign for over 2 years now, weekly, and show no signs of slowing down.
posted by rikschell at 2:53 PM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
I've been thinking about getting back into D&D, but I have a reflexive distrust of newer editions. Is that misplaced these days? (I'm not quite ground floor, but started playing D&D in 1982, and stopped around 1990.)
5e is a solid edition of the game that has streamlined a lot of things into some simpler mechanics. It's easier for new players to get into, and for me - who stopped playing for a long chunk of time in the early 00s, when 3.0, .5, and Pathfinder started introducing a tremendous amount of fiddly bits - it was pretty easy to pick up and get back into things. The streamlining has removed some of the frustrations I had with earlier editions (at the expense of over-simplification of some aspects of simulation) and put the focus on: faster moving play, allowing creativity and flexibility, and making pretty much every class fun from the outset. I have some gripes with it, but for an entry point/restarting point, it's a very good one.
The basic ruleset is available for free, online (pdf) and I would say take a look, just know that there are a lot more options available in the full game.
posted by nubs at 3:34 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
5e is a solid edition of the game that has streamlined a lot of things into some simpler mechanics. It's easier for new players to get into, and for me - who stopped playing for a long chunk of time in the early 00s, when 3.0, .5, and Pathfinder started introducing a tremendous amount of fiddly bits - it was pretty easy to pick up and get back into things. The streamlining has removed some of the frustrations I had with earlier editions (at the expense of over-simplification of some aspects of simulation) and put the focus on: faster moving play, allowing creativity and flexibility, and making pretty much every class fun from the outset. I have some gripes with it, but for an entry point/restarting point, it's a very good one.
The basic ruleset is available for free, online (pdf) and I would say take a look, just know that there are a lot more options available in the full game.
posted by nubs at 3:34 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I'll add another vote for 5th ed. It does the things it needs to do and doesn't do the stuff you don't need. I also stopped playing around the time 2nd ed came out and 3rd and 4th sounded awful to me. But 5th ed is light enough to make it easy and enough rules to keep the munchkins and min-maxers busy worrying about something. But not so many rules that they actually manage to get away with anything.
posted by GuyZero at 3:38 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by GuyZero at 3:38 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
5E seems like it it is much closer to the spirit of the olden days rules than were 3E & 4E, but without the self-contradictory/insanely complex rules that made pure 1E such a chore at times (weapon speed factors, anyone?).
posted by Chrysostom at 3:56 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Chrysostom at 3:56 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
- Hmmm, Bill Willingham didn’t like working on a project written by a woman? This is my surprised face.
Yeah he comes across as quite a putz in the article.
- So that's one of the things I don't like about the OSR "rulings not rules" thing. The natural inclination of GM's has always been to alter or make new rules. And then write them down. And often, publish them.
"Rulings not rules" is not about house rules, and OSR games are full of them and other weird and alternate character creation things, and those people are cobbling together stuff from each other all the time. Even the more purist types^ have house rules because 0E is so sketchy. "Rulings not rules" is about the DM's actions during play, the goal of living more within the simulation or mind's eye, and less in the rulebook.
A fun stat gen system I played recently: roll 3d6 thirty-six times, and pick a sequential set of six for your stats in order. It gives a nice mix of control and lack of it.
- My son asked me yesterday, "What made first edition so deadly?" I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got.
Well, there was a general commitment to deadliness and the possibility of TPKs, but first level survivability (and speed of progression) was often easier than people think in actual play because parties weren't so homogeneous by experience level, due to PC and/or player churn. My first character ever at a D&D club was first level, but she never had to worry about torch management because she just asked the cleric for one of their spare continual light copper pieces.
The old rules were not designed around what is now pretty widely considered core gameplay of, "A bunch of 1st level characters join up together, and the campaign is their adventures, as they progress pretty much in lockstep, the same players and characters week to week as much as possible."
But of course, if you are selling the game to people who have never played, and you do a poor job of explaining things, and there's a huge wave kids and teens coming in with no personal exposure, and your now-career is actually to publish and sell them products for their actual use, and plus your immediate pool of publish-able modules are tournament modules that are, it turns out, designed around equal characters in a linear march to the goal, and anyway people seem like this heroic style just fine? --- that's going to become the core gameplay.
And like the rules never really caught up with that until 4E.
There's no one true way of course, and anyway few people have the player base to run the West Marches. Things like the DCC funnel and Torchlight and "fantasy fucking Vietnam" are retro but IMHO not accurate. That doesn't make them not fun in their way either. But if you don't want to do that, but still want to play 1E or a flavor of Basic or 0E... it's okay to start the PCs at level two. Level one play is not central to game, honest. Maybe if you really want to shake up preconceptions, roll 1D3 for starting level lol.
posted by fleacircus at 4:10 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Yeah he comes across as quite a putz in the article.
- So that's one of the things I don't like about the OSR "rulings not rules" thing. The natural inclination of GM's has always been to alter or make new rules. And then write them down. And often, publish them.
"Rulings not rules" is not about house rules, and OSR games are full of them and other weird and alternate character creation things, and those people are cobbling together stuff from each other all the time. Even the more purist types^ have house rules because 0E is so sketchy. "Rulings not rules" is about the DM's actions during play, the goal of living more within the simulation or mind's eye, and less in the rulebook.
A fun stat gen system I played recently: roll 3d6 thirty-six times, and pick a sequential set of six for your stats in order. It gives a nice mix of control and lack of it.
- My son asked me yesterday, "What made first edition so deadly?" I explained that when rolling up a character, we used to roll 3d6 six times, and that was what you got.
Well, there was a general commitment to deadliness and the possibility of TPKs, but first level survivability (and speed of progression) was often easier than people think in actual play because parties weren't so homogeneous by experience level, due to PC and/or player churn. My first character ever at a D&D club was first level, but she never had to worry about torch management because she just asked the cleric for one of their spare continual light copper pieces.
The old rules were not designed around what is now pretty widely considered core gameplay of, "A bunch of 1st level characters join up together, and the campaign is their adventures, as they progress pretty much in lockstep, the same players and characters week to week as much as possible."
But of course, if you are selling the game to people who have never played, and you do a poor job of explaining things, and there's a huge wave kids and teens coming in with no personal exposure, and your now-career is actually to publish and sell them products for their actual use, and plus your immediate pool of publish-able modules are tournament modules that are, it turns out, designed around equal characters in a linear march to the goal, and anyway people seem like this heroic style just fine? --- that's going to become the core gameplay.
And like the rules never really caught up with that until 4E.
There's no one true way of course, and anyway few people have the player base to run the West Marches. Things like the DCC funnel and Torchlight and "fantasy fucking Vietnam" are retro but IMHO not accurate. That doesn't make them not fun in their way either. But if you don't want to do that, but still want to play 1E or a flavor of Basic or 0E... it's okay to start the PCs at level two. Level one play is not central to game, honest. Maybe if you really want to shake up preconceptions, roll 1D3 for starting level lol.
posted by fleacircus at 4:10 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Maybe if you really want to shake up preconceptions, roll 1D3 for starting level lol.
if I ran a campaign I'd just start characters around 4th or 5th level. About the only good thing about starting at 1st level is now much you appreciate not being completely useless once you level up.
posted by GuyZero at 4:47 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
if I ran a campaign I'd just start characters around 4th or 5th level. About the only good thing about starting at 1st level is now much you appreciate not being completely useless once you level up.
posted by GuyZero at 4:47 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Looking forward to reading all this stuff (while not at work). I remember years back with (I think) 3.5e that there was a lot of really saucy third-party stuff right alongside the core rulebooks at e.g. Borders.
posted by turbid dahlia at 5:38 PM on June 14, 2018
posted by turbid dahlia at 5:38 PM on June 14, 2018
Heh. A friend of a friend wrote a d20 "erotic" sourcebook as a cash cow to fund other RPG works that would have come out around that time. I do not know if it succeed in funding his other ventures.
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on June 14, 2018
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on June 14, 2018
(IIRC the big selling point was the table of magical STDs)
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Bigby's Spotted Dick
posted by nubs at 6:03 PM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by nubs at 6:03 PM on June 14, 2018 [5 favorites]
Hands in there air for all my siblings who first played D&D with chits instead of dice.
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:29 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:29 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
4e is basically World of Warcraft on paper. Every class is perfectly balanced against each other, which many people felt made all characters feel samey-samey. It was VERY combat focused: you had to use a grid and miniatures, and role-playing was de-emphasized (again, following the computer role playing game model). In a way, it was a return to the system's wargaming roots. But a lot of folks didn't like it, and it hastened the way for 5e.
It was closer to an SRPG like Fire Emblem - the comparisons with WoW are common but misguided imo. It was a fun, slick and tight turnbased videogame skirmish engine messily duct-taped to an effective but underdeveloped 'theatre of the mind' regular play environment that was just as roleplay focused as any other edition. Both were very solid, but the shift from one mode to another was, for all I still like the system, super clunky. And the magic items and modules were, sadly, rubbish.
I still think 4e was an influential and bold bit of design, you can find ideas from it in loads of systems like Dungeon World and 13th Age - there was a kitbash called fourthcore (sadly mostly gone from the net, now) that turned the lethality and insanity up to 11 and was just ridiculously fun.
posted by Sebmojo at 6:47 PM on June 14, 2018
It was closer to an SRPG like Fire Emblem - the comparisons with WoW are common but misguided imo. It was a fun, slick and tight turnbased videogame skirmish engine messily duct-taped to an effective but underdeveloped 'theatre of the mind' regular play environment that was just as roleplay focused as any other edition. Both were very solid, but the shift from one mode to another was, for all I still like the system, super clunky. And the magic items and modules were, sadly, rubbish.
I still think 4e was an influential and bold bit of design, you can find ideas from it in loads of systems like Dungeon World and 13th Age - there was a kitbash called fourthcore (sadly mostly gone from the net, now) that turned the lethality and insanity up to 11 and was just ridiculously fun.
posted by Sebmojo at 6:47 PM on June 14, 2018
Hands in there air for all my siblings who first played D&D with chits instead of dice.
If you had nothing but d6 but figured out how to simulate all the other ones, gimme x/2 hands, then add one; if both are now up, flip a coin; if heads, have Dave raise one additional hand and flip the coin again; if heads again, roll the d6 one more time, subtract 1 and add that many hands.
posted by Etrigan at 6:50 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
If you had nothing but d6 but figured out how to simulate all the other ones, gimme x/2 hands, then add one; if both are now up, flip a coin; if heads, have Dave raise one additional hand and flip the coin again; if heads again, roll the d6 one more time, subtract 1 and add that many hands.
posted by Etrigan at 6:50 PM on June 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Who else remembers the shitty plastic dice that you used a wax crayon on to fill in the grooves for the numbers so that they stood out?
posted by nubs at 7:52 PM on June 14, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by nubs at 7:52 PM on June 14, 2018 [10 favorites]
The most amazing thing to me is that D&Ds dumb and transparently-made-to-be-a-game-mechanic spell memorization system is actually lifted straight out of the stories of Jack Vance.
The difference being that the best-of-the-best wizard in The Dying Sun could memorize FIVE spells per day. And those spells were basically ultimate trump cards- they Immediately defeated the obstacle they were set against, whether killing a monster, or travelling to another star. It was also helped that the author was on the wizard's side, and those 3-5 spells would invariably be useful for the obstacles the wizard faced.
If I were to really adapt it to D&D, I'd have the wizard get one spell, plus an extra one ever four levels above 1. Each Spell solves a problem or defeats a monster, and the wizard just describes how, with as florid or weird a description as possible.
One's thoughts immediately turn to the infamous Gary Gygax column "Poker, Chess, and the AD&D System." Gygax's position was that any house ruling meant that you weren't, in fact, playing D&D/AD&D.
Well of course he would. If people made variations themselves, he wouldn't be able to sell anything. I regard it more like Poker, with Arduin Grimore being Fizzbin.
I still think 4e was an influential and bold bit of design, you can find ideas from it in loads of systems like Dungeon World and 13th Age - there was a kitbash called fourthcore (sadly mostly gone from the net, now) that turned the lethality and insanity up to 11 and was just ridiculously fun.
What I found was that character creation was complex, but gameplay was a hell of a lot of fun. Our group also didn't have any problems with integrating either the skill system or roleplay into the game. WoTC did drop the ball repeatedly as far as the support materials fr the game, which was a pity, as I thought the online character creator was really nice...when it worked.
posted by happyroach at 10:02 PM on June 14, 2018
The difference being that the best-of-the-best wizard in The Dying Sun could memorize FIVE spells per day. And those spells were basically ultimate trump cards- they Immediately defeated the obstacle they were set against, whether killing a monster, or travelling to another star. It was also helped that the author was on the wizard's side, and those 3-5 spells would invariably be useful for the obstacles the wizard faced.
If I were to really adapt it to D&D, I'd have the wizard get one spell, plus an extra one ever four levels above 1. Each Spell solves a problem or defeats a monster, and the wizard just describes how, with as florid or weird a description as possible.
One's thoughts immediately turn to the infamous Gary Gygax column "Poker, Chess, and the AD&D System." Gygax's position was that any house ruling meant that you weren't, in fact, playing D&D/AD&D.
Well of course he would. If people made variations themselves, he wouldn't be able to sell anything. I regard it more like Poker, with Arduin Grimore being Fizzbin.
I still think 4e was an influential and bold bit of design, you can find ideas from it in loads of systems like Dungeon World and 13th Age - there was a kitbash called fourthcore (sadly mostly gone from the net, now) that turned the lethality and insanity up to 11 and was just ridiculously fun.
What I found was that character creation was complex, but gameplay was a hell of a lot of fun. Our group also didn't have any problems with integrating either the skill system or roleplay into the game. WoTC did drop the ball repeatedly as far as the support materials fr the game, which was a pity, as I thought the online character creator was really nice...when it worked.
posted by happyroach at 10:02 PM on June 14, 2018
I ran a couple of 4E games. When 5E came out, a couple of players in one of them wanted to convert over--we did, but it sucked the life out of the game.
The other campaign, we actually finished, though we stopped at 20th level instead of going for 30th. When it was over, one of the players (whom I've been playing RPGs with for over 2 decades) declared that 4E was fun, but he never wanted to play it again.
4Es many fiddly bits and having systems for every aspect of planning games appealed to something in me.
I've since run a couple of 5E games that fell apart for external reasons. They were fun and my 11 year old is starting to cut his teeth as a 5E GM.
posted by Four Ds at 11:06 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
The other campaign, we actually finished, though we stopped at 20th level instead of going for 30th. When it was over, one of the players (whom I've been playing RPGs with for over 2 decades) declared that 4E was fun, but he never wanted to play it again.
4Es many fiddly bits and having systems for every aspect of planning games appealed to something in me.
I've since run a couple of 5E games that fell apart for external reasons. They were fun and my 11 year old is starting to cut his teeth as a 5E GM.
posted by Four Ds at 11:06 PM on June 14, 2018 [1 favorite]
Joey Michaels, I can determine that I got the Basic box set for Christmas 1979 (when I was 7 years old) because it had module B2 and chits. Eventually I got dice, the Monster Manual, and the DM Guide. I was
always the DM, so I never bothered to get the Players Handbook.
posted by rikschell at 4:56 AM on June 15, 2018
always the DM, so I never bothered to get the Players Handbook.
posted by rikschell at 4:56 AM on June 15, 2018
Vox has put out a short video explaining how - and perhaps more importantly why - to play D&D
posted by nubs at 9:31 AM on June 15, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by nubs at 9:31 AM on June 15, 2018 [1 favorite]
« Older You wanna leave a legacy? Get in the way, any way... | There's now a trillion dollars of uninvested... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Artw at 7:44 PM on June 13, 2018 [1 favorite]